I usually get a lot of **** for saying this, but i think animals like beef cattle and the likes should be regarded as lesser beings and treated acordingly.
Humane treatment, should be for humans only.
Tell me i'm wrong, and why, lets get a discussion going

Unnecessary cruelty is intolerable (kicking dogs, setting cats on fire, etc). Cruelty in the form of cheap and efficient food production is practical an essential. There are 7 billion of us, and we need to eat.

well from and agricultural point of view beef cattle and meat in general is a very ineffecient way of producing food so if the companies wanted to sell food to third world countries they would find a way to sell as much food as possible and if thats true then they would probalbly end up selling corn, wheat and soybeans instead of meat since its more food for less effort. but even if your hypothisis was true.
the notion that:" if you dont do it, somebody else will" is a pretty lazy kinda world view that i cant say i agree with.

i dont particularly like thinking that way towards anything, but with the food industry as large, powerful, and most likely corrupted as it is. They will always find a way to do what they want, thats all im sayin

Personally, weather you care or not, Im a christian, and to me, God put animals on the earth to be used for working and for eating. of course i still like domesticated animals, but im not actually sure if the bible speaks on that or not

and many people think that the new testament just negates the old testament.
but actually it doesn't, They work together, Certain things are meant to be taken in the context of that time period, Others are not.
like this case in perticular he is speaking to noah after the flood (lemme know if you are not familiar with the story" so he is speaking to noah and for all mankind after him

God’s Covenant With Noah

9 Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. 2 The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands. 3 Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

4 “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. 5 And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being.

and as far as Lifeblood is concerned, as far as i know, i think it has to do with eating raw meats, and that God was aware of that is could potentially be unhealthy or deadly to not cook meat correctly, so to have it drained of its blood and such

Well he has always been the same God, and always will be, But the testament begins with the gospel, books Mathew Mark Luke and John, and its the story of Jesus Christ and his death from slightly different experiences of those men.

the bible is laid out, almost in a way that is exactly how you are supposed to read it, i mean that's obvious like any book, but it starts with explaining how everything came to be and why, and teaches why things are different now than from the beginning, and throught the course of that teaches you how you are at fault, and need forgiveness, and then the gospel shows that you can have forgiveness, God has never changed.

but the tone in which He shows himself might, some things that might even seem too harsh, once you kind see the whole thing it all makes sense,

its kind of a bad analogy, but think about when a parent is spanking their kids, in the kids head, their parent is the meanest worst person ever, and they only want to hurt them, but once they have the big picture later in life, they see it was out of love, and trying to raise them with a proper attitude towards right and wrong, and this does not include child abuse obviously.

Using your logic anything that is not human is lesser and should be treated accordingly.
Sounds awfully close to a certain point of view where eugenics was interpreted as 'only white blond people are pure humans and therefore only they should be allowed privilege'.
I'm no vegan and I'm guilty of buying products I know are probably not produced ethically out of necessity, but I cannot imagine causing any animal deliberate pain and suffering. Maybe it's for my own conscience (and therefore selfishness). I have no qualms about hunting (it's natural) so long as death is brought on as quickly as possible. I could shoot an animal in the head so long as it benefited myself and/or other people. Deliberately causing prolonged periods of physiological or psychological stress is not something I could condone. This is my own philosophy regarding other people as well, which is why I'll never understand anyone who bullies, rapes or tortures. It seems counter-productive to cause pain to your own feckin' species.

bovine agriculture? yes, woo, beef, great. But how about a series of set rules such as 'not putting the cow under anesthesia while you slice it up open alive in order to make the most blood leave the body without coagulating"?

i'm not saying we should let the cows go wild, i'm not saying anything really when it comes right down to it. But how about some humane limits

Because humans are able to contribute something to society other than tasty flesh and bottled lactation. A cow is only as valuable as it's body is worth on a chopping block. There is absolutely nothing they can contribute to the world that is not infinitely more productive when their "feelings" are disregarded in the name of efficiency. A depressed cow tastes the exact same as a happy cow. A human has the potential to contribute in many ways to the betterment of the entire species for the better part of a century. We have laws regarding the treatment of other humans because no large civilization could survive without enforcing some form of order upon it's citizens. Cows are not going to rise up and rebel against us because of unethical slaughterhouse practices.

No. You just have an imperceptible attention span. The entire rest of my comment was pointing out that they cannot contribute anything to society that cannot be gained by force while keeping them in economically efficient living conditions. My last sentence was pointing out that there is absolutely no negative repercussions to doing this, as they cannot do anything about it.

The only downside to a company doing this, is that they have hippies protesting their foods, these are almost exclusively vegetarians/vegans who don't eat meat anyways. That is like someone with a peanut allergy boycotting peanut butter. It isn't exactly going to impact their sales, but they can sell their product at a lower cost with a higher profit margin. It's a win-win.

If we don't use them for something, they'll go extinct. Because no one would want to treat them the way we do now... giving them shelter, food, freedom to roam, water, and medicine. They'd die out in Winter, fall victim to disease, and would starve to death during a drought. Not only that, but the economy would take a major hit, the price of food would rise dramatically, and you'd have to pay twice as much for your "humane" meal.
Once you realize you can't communicate with FOOD animals in any way because they lack emotion, intelligence, language, and pretty much everything needed to be deemed smart, you'll start to enjoy meat a lot more.

WTF DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH NOT FLIPPING COWS WITH FORKLIFTS OR STARVING THEM TO DEATH FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME I DO SUPPORT EATING MEAT I JUST DONT SUPPORT TORTURING IT
(I've never attempted a rage comment before. How did I do?)

and plants leak sap and other liquids when the get cut apart or tapped for syrup.
so i guess you cant eat plants either then right? lol

Humane vs ethical.
Im not saying roll them around with forklifts like you see on those asshole "Stop supporting this by eating beef" commercials. But i honestly dont feel they should be treated like humans(like put on a pedestal). we raise crops with the sole purpose of eating them, how are these animals any different?
I do however feel that they should be treated with at least a modicum of respect. theyre a building block to our existence, they should be respected as such. i dont see anything wrong with using animals like that, who lack the higher brain function, as a food source. its necessary to survive. but you shouldnt be grimy and assholes about it, like letting animals suffer after slitting their throats and bleeding them dry. make it quick and painless. thats how i would want it.

You brought up cows, so i stuck with it.
i meant no disrespect, wasnt calling you wrong or anything, was only contributing to the convo by adding my opinion after you stated yours, hence me replying to your comment, then adding my opinion under a separate titled section.

And about you plant remark, they secrete the substances as a response to an injury. Even without the higher brain functions of a "Living Creature" they still recognize something is wrong and cells act accordingly to fix the problem.

I just dont see the idea of thinking:"I dont want to eat that cow unless it had a good life" it still got killed far before it would have died if it got to live out its life.
i just doesnt make sense to me

now that I think about it I typically just check out the local shops to see if their any good. My towns butcher shop for example has some of the best cuts of meat I've ever had and they are not cruel to the cows they kill (and can be pretty cheap at times)

It's a fact of biology that higher animals like cows and pigs have complex emotions and are capable of higher thought. Treating them like **** just because they're less sophisticated than we are is detestable and short sighted. I'm not saying that it's morally wrong to kill them for their meat, but it is morally wrong to ignore that they are thinking, feeling beings that deserve to be happy just as much as you do.

If you think i'm ignorant then enlighten me.
The reason i started this discussion was to see what other people thought and find out if i could agree with those points of view. I am not steadfast in my opinion and if you truly belive that you are right, you might be able to convince me.
So if you would take the time, then please tell why you think i am such a fool.

Even if a being is "lesser" doesn't mean you should treat it poorly. Cows are a life source for us, if we abuse that we suffer as well. A cow kept, relaxed, well fed, and happy will be a healthy cow. Something better to eat. If you harvest cattle that are malnourished and/or constantly stressed for their whole life, the meat quality is going to suffer. It's not that hard to treat an animal gently, with some compassion and respect before giving it a quick death and then eating it.

Thinking other beings are lesser than you and that they should be treated as if they are lesser than you is just about the basis of all cruelty. Now, I could understand if they did something to deserve it, but just being cows here, they don't hurt anyone.

Now, given that you basically NEED them to live. Why would you abuse your own resources? It affects you, personally. Cows that are abused and stressed will give you less quality milk, and less quality meat. Now if you're telling me that you can't even be compassionate to animals strictly for the benefit of yourself, that doesn't even pass as selfish. That's just someone WANTING to be cruel to animals because they are a ****** person and want other being to suffer.

ok, i get why you would misunderstand me there, that was a pretty wierd way for me to put it.
what i meant was, that we should treat animals the way that is best for us regardless of what that treatment might be.i dont mind treading animals in a good way, but only if it is of benifit to us and no further.

Better treatment for animals is good for us though, so I don't see why we shouldn't treat animals better. We get something from them, so we can't abuse that; and it's not like it's difficult to be nice to them. Feed them and let them grow up without abusing them and when they're big enough *Boom* shoot it in the side of the head. It lived comfortably, died instantly, and you got all the milk and meat from it in the highest of quality. Everyone really seems to win there.

sure, but its not just a question of quality its also a question effeciency, and with the technology we have right now a farm with a top-effecient beef cattle production requires a little animal cruelty (if not alot)

If a little cruelty is needed, then it's needed, but we should try to minimize it, if not eliminate it if there's any way. Now if you don't feel any compassion for them (which you don't) fine, but like I said they are a resource and we should respect those since they are our livelihood and it's been shown that abusing resources hurts everyone and is the downfall of any species.

If we discovered aliens and found them to be 10 times more intelligent than us I imagine we would be pissed if they tortured and ate us, then rationalized it with a big IQ. Or do you draw some arbitrary line at sentience?